The perpetual DEX market has become one of the most competitive sectors in crypto.
Hyperliquid proved that a decentralized derivatives venue could compete with centralized exchanges on speed, liquidity and user experience. The response has been an explosion of new architectures: zero-fee ZK order books, RFQ exchanges, high-performance appchains, oracle-based liquidity pools, unified-margin systems, permissionless market deployment and a new generation of platforms bringing stocks, commodities, indices and foreign exchange onchain.
That makes the old question, “What is the best perp DEX?”, increasingly difficult to answer.
The cheapest exchange may not give you the best execution.
The venue with the highest reported volume may not have the deepest book for your particular market.
A zero-fee platform can still cost more because of spread, funding or slippage.
And an exchange that is ideal for a $2,000 BTC position may be a poor venue for a $500,000 trade.
Decentralised News therefore evaluated the market across a broader set of factors including liquidity, open interest, execution model, trading costs, custody, security architecture, liquidation mechanics, market breadth and API infrastructure.
Our conclusion is that Hyperliquid remains the strongest all-round perpetual DEX entering 2027, but the market has fragmented enough that several rivals now beat it in specific categories.
DN Best Overall Perp DEX: Hyperliquid
DN Best Zero-Fee Choice: Lighter
DN Best RFQ Model: Variational Omni
DN Best High-Volume Challenger: Aster
DN Best for Market Makers: GRVT
DN Best Oracle/Pool Architecture: GMX
DN Best Flat Fee Model: Extended
DN Best Emerging Unified-Margin DEX: Nado
DN Best Retail Perps + Options Venue: Paradex
DN Best RWA Perp Specialist: Veranta
This review was researched for the 2027 market using product and fee information available in October 2026. Perpetual exchanges change quickly. Fees, liquidity, incentives and operational status should always be verified directly before trading.
What Matters
The most important finding from reviewing the perp DEX market is that headline trading fees are becoming less useful as a way to rank exchanges.
Lighter Standard currently offers zero maker and zero taker fees.
Variational Omni also charges no explicit trading fee.
Paradex Retail publishes a zero maker and zero taker schedule.
Extended charges zero maker and 0.025% taker.
Aster's standard USDT perpetuals currently start around zero maker and 0.04% taker.
GRVT can actually pay makers through rebates.
Yet that does not automatically make any one of them cheaper than Hyperliquid.
Why?
Because the real trading cost is closer to:
Trading fee + spread + slippage + funding + price impact + borrowing costs + builder/deployer fees + withdrawal costs
A trader opening and closing a position within twenty minutes has a very different cost profile from someone holding a leveraged trade for two weeks.
A $10,000 position also has completely different liquidity requirements from a $1 million order.
The best perpetual exchange therefore depends on what you are actually trying to do.
DN Perp DEX Ranking 2027
Our current overall ranking is:
-
Hyperliquid — 9.7/10
-
Lighter — 9.4/10
-
Variational Omni — 9.3/10
-
Aster — 9.2/10
-
GRVT — 9.1/10
-
GMX — 9.0/10
-
edgeX — 9.0/10
-
Extended — 8.9/10
-
Pacifica — 8.8/10
-
Nado — 8.8/10
-
StandX — 8.7/10
-
ApeX Omni — 8.7/10
-
Paradex — 8.6/10
-
Veranta — 8.6/10
-
Vest Markets — 8.5/10
-
Jupiter Perps — 8.4/10
-
Antarctic — 8.3/10
-
Ondo Perps — 8.3/10
-
dYdX — 8.2/10
-
gTrade — 8.2/10
-
SynFutures — 8.1/10
-
Arcus — 8.1/10
-
MYX Finance — 8.0/10
-
Primit — 7.9/10
-
Aevo — 7.9/10
-
SAI — 7.8/10
-
Superp — 7.8/10
-
IOTrader — 7.7/10
-
EVEDEX — 7.2/10
The ranking is not based on affiliate economics. Affiliate commission contributes zero to our scoring methodology.
Why Hyperliquid Is Still Number One
Hyperliquid remains the reference point for decentralized perpetual trading.
Its biggest advantage is no longer novelty.
It is network effect.
The exchange has built the deepest concentration of open interest, traders, developers, liquidity providers and third-party infrastructure in the sector.
That matters more than it might appear.
Liquidity attracts traders.
Traders attract market makers.
Market makers improve spreads.
Better spreads attract more traders.
APIs encourage applications to build on top of the venue.
Those applications bring another wave of users.
Hyperliquid has now reached the stage where this flywheel becomes increasingly difficult for competitors to reproduce.
Its expansion through HIP-3 is also important.
HIP-3 allows deployers to create new perpetual markets rather than relying entirely on markets selected by the core venue.
That makes Hyperliquid increasingly resemble derivatives infrastructure rather than simply a trading website.
Stocks, commodities, indices and other real-world markets can increasingly sit on top of the same broader execution ecosystem.
Hyperliquid is not the cheapest exchange in every scenario.
But if you want one venue combining liquidity, APIs, active markets, execution infrastructure and ecosystem depth, it remains our first choice.
Lighter: The Zero-Fee Threat
Lighter is probably the most important direct challenge to Hyperliquid.
Its Standard account model currently charges:
0% maker fees
and
0% taker fees.
That immediately changes the economics for high-turnover retail traders.
But zero fees require context.
Lighter deliberately differentiates account classes.
Standard accounts receive the zero-fee structure but operate with different execution priorities, rate limits and latency characteristics than higher-tier trading accounts.
That is not necessarily a weakness.
It is actually a clever form of market segmentation.
Retail traders get extremely attractive economics.
More demanding professional traders can choose infrastructure optimized around performance rather than purely price.
Our view is that Lighter is currently the strongest default alternative to Hyperliquid for fee-sensitive active traders.
Decentralised News referral:
https://app.lighter.xyz/?referral=659323WR
Variational Omni: Zero Fee Does Not Mean Zero Economics
Variational is one of the most conceptually interesting platforms in the sector.
Instead of building the experience entirely around a conventional visible order book, Omni uses an RFQ-style model.
The trader asks for a quote.
Market makers compete to provide that quote.
There is currently no explicit trading fee.
That does not mean nobody gets paid.
The economics move into the spread.
This is important because it exposes a weakness in almost every simplistic exchange-comparison article.
A platform charging:
0%
can still give you a worse final execution price than one charging:
0.04%.
The only number that ultimately matters is:
What price did you actually receive?
Variational's broader derivatives infrastructure also makes it particularly interesting for more sophisticated markets beyond standard crypto perpetuals.
Aster: The Scale Challenger
Aster has become one of the largest perpetual venues by reported activity.
Its fee model is also aggressive.
Current standard USDT perpetual pricing is around:
0% maker
and
0.04% taker.
Some USD1 markets can be even cheaper.
Aster therefore combines two things that matter:
large activity
and
competitive pricing.
Our main caution is that reported volume should never be treated as synonymous with execution quality.
The better test is what happens when you place:
$10,000,
$100,000,
or $1 million
through the market.
How much slippage occurs?
How quickly does the order fill?
How much quoted depth was actually executable?
How reliable are stop orders during volatility?
Those are the numbers that matter.
Aster referral:
https://www.asterdex.com/en/referral/537ed8
GRVT: One of the Best Exchanges for Makers
GRVT has one of the more interesting fee structures for liquidity providers.
Its current base perpetual fee schedule starts with a tiny maker rebate rather than a maker charge.
The economic advantage becomes larger as trading volume increases.
That makes GRVT particularly compelling for:
market makers,
high-frequency strategies,
and traders who routinely use passive orders.
Its hybrid architecture and validity infrastructure are also technically interesting because the platform attempts to combine centralized-exchange-like trading performance with cryptographically enforced settlement.
For takers, other venues can still be cheaper.
For makers, GRVT deserves serious attention.
Referral:
https://grvt.io/exchange/sign-up?ref=8YKP2VP
Code: 8YKP2VP
GMX: The Alternative Architecture
GMX should not be evaluated like Hyperliquid.
It solves the same broad problem using a very different architecture.
Rather than depending entirely on a traditional order book, GMX uses liquidity pools and oracle-based pricing.
Trading costs therefore include more than a maker/taker number.
Users need to understand:
position fees,
price impact,
borrowing,
funding,
liquidity utilization,
and network costs.
This sounds more complicated.
But the model can also provide powerful advantages.
A large trader may sometimes find a pool-based venue attractive because execution does not depend on crossing a conventional order book in exactly the same way.
GMX is therefore the best mature alternative for traders who specifically prefer oracle-and-pool execution.
DN referral:
https://app.gmx.io/#/trade/?ref=decentralised
edgeX: A Serious High-Performance Challenger
edgeX has grown enough that it should no longer be viewed merely as another incentive-driven perpetual exchange.
Its orderbook architecture, high transaction throughput and increasingly substantial market activity place it among the more credible competitors to the largest venues.
The current fee structure is also competitive, particularly at higher volume tiers.
Its challenge is similar to Aster's.
The next phase is proving that large reported activity translates consistently into:
deep executable books,
tight spreads,
stable funding,
and reliable stress-market performance.
DN referral:
https://pro.edgex.exchange/referral/DECENTRALISED
Code: DECENTRALISED
Extended: One of the Cleanest Fee Structures
Extended has one of our favorite fee schedules because it is easy to understand.
Current base trading fees are approximately:
0% maker
and
0.025% taker.
That is extremely competitive.
The platform uses Starknet infrastructure and targets both crypto and traditional-market perpetuals.
One caveat is important.
External frontends or builders can potentially add a separate builder fee.
That means someone trading directly and someone reaching Extended through another application may not necessarily experience identical economics.
Still, for traders who want a straightforward low-fee orderbook model, Extended deserves a place near the top of the shortlist.
Pacifica: One of Solana's Strongest Perp Orderbooks
Solana has increasingly become a battleground for decentralized derivatives.
Pacifica is one of the strongest orderbook-based contenders.
Its relatively strong recent trading activity and growing liquidity make it particularly relevant for Solana-native users.
But it should not be treated as identical to fully onchain execution models.
The architecture contains different custody and execution assumptions.
That does not automatically make it worse.
It simply means traders should understand what part of the trading lifecycle is:
onchain,
offchain,
or hybrid.
Nado: One of the Most Interesting New Designs
Nado may not yet have Hyperliquid's mindshare, but its architecture is worth watching closely.
Its broader design combines:
perpetuals,
spot markets,
and money markets.
The key concept is capital efficiency.
Instead of treating each market as a separate isolated financial product, the system can allow collateral and positions to interact more efficiently.
This is where the next perp DEX war may move.
The first generation of exchanges competed on leverage.
The second competed on fees.
The next generation may compete on:
how much useful financial activity the same dollar of collateral can support.
Nado referral:
https://app.nado.xyz?join=n6u7ree
Code: n6u7ree
StandX: Yield-Bearing Margin Changes the Equation
StandX is another platform experimenting with the role of collateral.
Its DUSD system and broader position-yield concepts raise an interesting question:
Why should margin sit idle while you trade?
If collateral can generate yield while simultaneously supporting leveraged positions, the economics of a perpetual exchange change substantially.
That is not free money.
Yield-bearing collateral introduces its own dependencies and risks.
But strategically, this is likely to become a major competitive area.
StandX referral:
https://standx.com/referral?code=decentralised
Code: decentralised
Paradex: Zero-Fee Retail Perps and Options
Paradex has one of the most aggressive retail fee models in the market.
Retail users currently benefit from:
0% maker
and
0% taker
across products including perpetuals.
Paradex also has an important advantage over many competitors:
options.
That gives traders access to a broader derivatives stack rather than perpetual futures alone.
Professional and API users can face different fee economics, so the zero-fee retail schedule should not be applied blindly to every account class.
DN referral:
https://app.paradex.trade/r/decentralised
Code: decentralised
Veranta: The Platform Formerly Known as Avantis
One of the easiest ways to identify an outdated perpetual DEX article in 2027 will be to see whether it still treats Avantis as the current brand.
Avantis was rebranded as Veranta in September 2026.
The new identity reflects a much broader strategy.
Veranta is no longer positioning itself only around crypto perpetuals.
The platform is expanding aggressively into:
stocks,
FX,
metals,
indices,
and other real-world markets.
Its current RWA strategy includes zero-commission trading for some real-world asset markets.
This is one of the clearest signs that decentralized perpetual exchanges are evolving into global leveraged trading infrastructure.
Vest Markets: 24/7 Stocks, FX, Commodities and Crypto
Vest Markets belongs in the same structural conversation.
It is not “Vest v2.”
The current product should simply be referred to as Vest Markets.
Vest offers perpetual markets covering areas including:
equities,
crypto,
commodities,
and FX.
The platform also operates a separate funded-trading proposition through Vest Capital.
Those are related products, but users should not confuse the funded trader layer with the perpetual exchange itself.
Current Decentralised News referral:
https://next.vestmarkets.com/r/6ydecentralisednews
Code:
6YDECENTRALISEDNEWS
Vest is especially interesting because it illustrates the gradual disappearance of the boundary between:
crypto exchange
and
global markets platform.
Jupiter Perps: The Solana Pool Alternative
If Pacifica represents the Solana orderbook model, Jupiter Perps represents a different approach.
Jupiter uses JLP liquidity and oracle-based execution.
That makes the comparison similar to:
Hyperliquid versus GMX.
One platform centers execution around an order book.
The other relies more heavily on pooled liquidity.
Neither architecture is automatically superior.
A trader should care about:
their market,
trade size,
price impact,
funding,
and available pool liquidity.
Jupiter remains one of the strongest choices for users already living inside the Solana ecosystem.
DN referral:
https://jup.ag/?ref=whj8az405rdo
Ondo Perps: RWA Perpetuals Become Their Own Category
Ondo's entry into perpetual markets is significant because the brand is already closely associated with tokenized real-world assets.
Ondo Perps focuses heavily on markets such as:
equities,
indices,
and commodities.
This creates a different use case from a standard BTC/ETH derivatives exchange.
The key questions become:
How is the underlying price determined?
What happens outside traditional market hours?
How are dividends reflected?
What does the funding mechanism look like?
How much liquidity exists when the underlying market is closed?
RWA perpetuals are not stocks.
Buying an Apple perpetual does not normally give you Apple shares, voting rights or ordinary shareholder ownership.
That distinction needs to remain clear.
DN referral:
https://app.ondoperps.xyz/?ref=P9N3ST
Code: P9N3ST
dYdX: Still Important, No Longer the Default Leader
dYdX helped define decentralized perpetual trading.
Its appchain and orderbook architecture were major milestones for the sector.
The market has simply moved extremely quickly.
Hyperliquid gained the liquidity network effect.
Newer exchanges aggressively compressed fees.
Other platforms experimented with ZK architectures, RFQ execution and RWA markets.
dYdX remains relevant.
But historical importance alone does not justify ranking it above exchanges currently offering stronger liquidity or economics.
gTrade: Synthetic Markets and Extreme Breadth
gTrade takes another distinctive route.
The platform supports a broad range of synthetic markets spanning crypto and traditional financial assets.
Its strength is therefore not necessarily having the deepest conventional order book.
It is market breadth.
For traders looking for leveraged exposure to markets that are not widely available on conventional perp DEXs, gTrade remains an important specialist.
DN referral:
https://gains.trade/referrals?ref=decentralised
MYX Finance: Permissionless Perpetual Markets
MYX is particularly interesting because it pushes toward permissionless market creation.
This is strategically important.
Today's exchanges still decide which assets deserve perpetual markets.
The long-term model may look different.
If infrastructure allows new assets to gain functioning derivatives markets quickly, then listing itself becomes permissionless infrastructure.
That could be especially important for:
new tokens,
long-tail assets,
RWAs,
and markets that centralized exchanges are unwilling to list.
DN referral:
https://app.myx.finance/referrals?invitationCode=PHSTTHK
Code: PHSTTHK
What About Axiom, Based and Blackboard?
These platforms matter enormously.
But they need to be categorized correctly.
Axiom provides Hyperliquid perpetual access inside a broader trading terminal.
Based builds a consumer financial interface around markets including Hyperliquid.
Blackboard aggregates access to multiple onchain markets.
These are not necessarily independent pools of underlying liquidity.
That distinction matters.
Imagine five trading apps all route BTC perpetuals into Hyperliquid.
A comparison site might claim there are six separate exchanges:
Hyperliquid
plus five frontends.
But economically, much of the actual liquidity may still come from the same underlying venue.
This is why Decentralised News separates:
execution venues
from
access layers.
It creates a cleaner picture of the market.
Why Zero-Fee Perp DEXs Aren't Actually Free
Suppose you want to trade $100,000 of ETH.
Exchange A charges:
0% taker fee.
Exchange B charges:
0.04%.
At first glance Exchange A wins.
But imagine Exchange A gives you 8 basis points of worse execution.
That represents approximately:
$80
of execution cost.
Exchange B charges:
$40
in taker fees.
If its deeper book produces almost no slippage, Exchange B can actually be cheaper.
Now add funding.
Imagine you hold the position for seven days.
The difference in funding between the venues could exceed both numbers.
This is why we believe the industry needs to stop ranking derivatives exchanges using one fee column.
Funding Is the Hidden Perp Tax
Funding keeps perpetual prices anchored toward the reference market.
Depending on positioning, longs may pay shorts or shorts may pay longs.
Funding is therefore not simply an exchange fee.
It is a transfer between market participants.
But economically, the result is the same:
your position can become more expensive to hold.
For scalpers, entry and exit execution matter enormously.
For swing traders, funding can dominate the trade.
For long-duration leveraged strategies, funding can determine whether a thesis is profitable at all.
Our rule is:
Scalpers should obsess over execution. Swing traders should obsess over funding. Large traders need to obsess over both.
The $10,000, $100,000 and $1 Million Problem
Exchange rankings change with trade size.
A $10,000 position can often prioritize:
low fees,
good UI,
reasonable funding,
and acceptable liquidity.
At $100,000, the discussion changes.
Now you care much more about:
depth,
price impact,
execution latency,
and cancellation reliability.
At $1 million, almost everything changes.
You may need:
split execution,
block or RFQ liquidity,
maker programs,
portfolio margin,
institutional APIs,
and much deeper analysis of liquidation infrastructure.
This is why our flagship Decentralised News version includes the DN Perp DEX Pathfinder + All-In Cost Engine.
Rather than declaring one universal winner, the tool helps model which venue makes sense for a specific trade.
Perp DEX Security Is Not Binary
The term “decentralized exchange” can create a false sense that every venue has the same custody model.
They do not.
Some systems use appchains.
Some use ZK rollups.
Some combine offchain matching with onchain settlement.
Some depend on liquidity pools.
Some use hosted wallet infrastructure.
Some use centralized sequencers.
The correct questions are much more specific.
Who controls the collateral?
Can funds be withdrawn if the website disappears?
What happens if the sequencer stops?
Can administrators change margin parameters?
How are oracle prices selected?
How do liquidations happen?
What happens if a bridge fails?
Has the relevant smart-contract system been audited?
Those questions matter more than whether the marketing page uses the word “decentralized.”
Stop-Loss Reliability Matters More Than Most Traders Realize
Another area where traditional rankings are weak is stop-loss behavior.
A stop order is not a magical guarantee that a position closes at the selected price.
During extreme volatility there can be:
latency,
slippage,
oracle movement,
insufficient liquidity,
transaction failure,
or delayed trigger execution.
Two exchanges with identical fees can therefore produce radically different outcomes during a liquidation cascade.
This is why Decentralised News is separately developing a Perp DEX Stop-Loss Reliability Benchmark.
Eventually, the best perpetual exchange ranking should include actual stress-event execution rather than simply product specifications.
RWA Perpetuals Could Become Bigger Than Crypto Perps
One of our highest-conviction theses is that perpetual infrastructure will eventually extend far beyond cryptocurrencies.
The architecture is almost ideal for synthetic global markets.
A perpetual contract does not require the trader to own the underlying asset.
That makes it possible to create leveraged exposure to:
stocks,
FX,
commodities,
indices,
interest rates,
private-company proxies,
and potentially increasingly exotic financial variables.
Veranta is moving aggressively in this direction.
Vest Markets is doing the same.
Ondo has entered the category.
Hyperliquid HIP-3 provides infrastructure for specialized deployers.
GMX has expanded into TradFi markets.
The perpetual DEX may therefore evolve into something much bigger than a decentralized alternative to Binance Futures.
It could become a global synthetic asset layer.
AI Agents Could Change Which Perp DEX Wins
Humans care about interfaces.
AI agents care about:
APIs,
predictable execution,
machine-readable market data,
clear permissions,
stable error behavior,
and deterministic transaction flows.
That creates another competitive dimension.
An exchange that is slightly worse for a human trader might be dramatically better for an autonomous trading agent.
The future winner therefore may not have the prettiest charting interface.
It may have the best infrastructure for:
routing,
permissions,
risk controls,
API reliability,
and machine execution.
This is why agentic finance is increasingly relevant to perpetual DEX analysis.
The DN Perp Execution Graph
Our longer-term objective is to move beyond annual rankings.
The ideal perpetual exchange dataset should answer questions such as:
Where can I execute a $10,000 BTC long most cheaply right now?
Which exchange has the lowest 30-day funding cost for ETH?
Which venue has the most reliable stop-loss execution?
Where does a $1 million market order create the least price impact?
Which exchange maintained liquidity best during the last crash?
Which platform processes withdrawals fastest after extreme volatility?
Which RWA perp stays closest to its underlying reference market outside cash-market hours?
That becomes a much more valuable dataset than:
“Here are the ten best exchanges.”
We call that concept the:
DN Perp Execution Graph
The 2027 Perp DEX Index is the first editorial layer of that system.
The Signal
The perp DEX battle is gradually moving away from one question:
Who has the best exchange?
toward another:
Who owns the best layer of the trading stack?
One company may own liquidity.
Another may own market creation.
Another may own the wallet.
Another may own the terminal.
Another may provide AI routing.
Another may control the collateral layer.
This is increasingly a modular financial system.
And that means users need to understand where the actual risk and execution occur.
DN Alpha Thesis
The end state of perpetual trading may look less like a collection of independent exchanges and more like a modular execution cloud.
Liquidity venues provide books and pools.
HIP-3-style deployers create new markets.
Protocols provide collateral.
Frontends aggregate access.
AI agents search for the best execution.
Wallet infrastructure controls permissions.
The user may eventually stop choosing an exchange altogether.
Instead, a trading agent could receive an instruction such as:
“Go long $100,000 of ETH for 48 hours with maximum 5 basis points expected slippage, self-custodial settlement and the lowest expected all-in cost.”
The agent could then compare:
fees,
funding,
depth,
collateral,
and execution reliability
across venues automatically.
At that point, the real competitive advantage becomes being the venue that machines consistently choose.
That is why the long-term perp DEX battle is about far more than trading fees.
Final Verdict
Hyperliquid remains our best overall perpetual DEX entering 2027.
Its current combination of:
liquidity,
open interest,
market breadth,
developer ecosystem,
APIs,
and HIP-3 infrastructure
makes it the industry's benchmark.
But the market is no longer winner-takes-all.
Lighter has one of the strongest retail fee propositions.
Variational has reinvented the economics around RFQ execution.
Aster combines activity and competitive fees.
GRVT stands out for makers.
GMX provides a mature alternative execution architecture.
Extended offers unusually clean pricing.
Pacifica is emerging strongly on Solana.
Nado and StandX are experimenting with the future of capital efficiency.
Paradex combines zero-fee retail trading with options.
Veranta, Vest Markets, Ondo and HIP-3 deployers are pushing perpetuals into global financial markets.
The correct question is therefore no longer:
“What is the cheapest perpetual DEX?”
It is:
“Which venue gives me the best realized execution for this exact trade?”
That is the standard we think perpetual DEX comparisons should ultimately be judged against.
Selected DN Referral Links
Where Decentralised News has a current verified commercial relationship, the following links may be used. Referral terms can change, so verify the live platform terms before trading.
Lighter:
https://app.lighter.xyz/?referral=659323WR
Aster:
https://www.asterdex.com/en/referral/537ed8
Code: 537ed8
GRVT:
https://grvt.io/exchange/sign-up?ref=8YKP2VP
Code: 8YKP2VP
GMX:
https://app.gmx.io/#/trade/?ref=decentralised
edgeX:
https://pro.edgex.exchange/referral/DECENTRALISED
Code: DECENTRALISED
Nado:
https://app.nado.xyz?join=n6u7ree
Code: n6u7ree
StandX:
https://standx.com/referral?code=decentralised
Code: decentralised
Paradex:
https://app.paradex.trade/r/decentralised
Code: decentralised
Vest Markets:
https://next.vestmarkets.com/r/6ydecentralisednews
Code: 6YDECENTRALISEDNEWS
Jupiter:
https://jup.ag/?ref=whj8az405rdo
Ondo Perps:
https://app.ondoperps.xyz/?ref=P9N3ST
Code: P9N3ST
gTrade:
https://gains.trade/referrals?ref=decentralised
MYX Finance:
https://app.myx.finance/referrals?invitationCode=PHSTTHK
Code: PHSTTHK
SAI:
https://sai.fun/perps?ref=DECENTRALISED
Code: DECENTRALISED
Superp:
https://www.superp.xyz/en/airdrop/invite/A2C26243
Code: A2C26243
ApeX Omni:
https://pro.apex.exchange/trade/BTCUSD/register?affiliate_id=6327&group_id=7603
Code: 6327
Affiliate relationships do not determine our rankings.
Risk Disclosure
Perpetual futures are leveraged derivatives.
Losses can occur rapidly and can exceed the amount a trader expects to lose if risk is poorly managed.
Funding, slippage, spreads, price impact, liquidations, oracle failures, smart-contract vulnerabilities, bridge failures, sequencer failures and platform outages can all affect results.
Real-world-asset perpetuals are derivatives and generally do not represent direct ownership of the underlying shares, commodities or other referenced assets.
This article is educational only and should not be treated as investment, financial, legal or tax advice.
Read the complete technical review on Decentralised News
